3 is safer.What would you like better: The best 3 players for each teams, 2 player are cut OR The best 4 players for each team, 1 player is cut
I been aiming for that for quite some time.
I think 20% is the correct cutoff.Definitely 4. 3 gives them too much leeway if more than one person doesn't show up, which should be devastating to your score.
Going off of the numbers that sounds good. But let's be real some of these teams have an automatic Miss on their team... I mean to say that a couple of the teams have some people that are notorious for missing weight a lot. (Not the Reapers, were good). But it's whatever four works for me three works for me the Reapers are going to mop the floor with you other pieces of shit anyways.I think 20% is the correct cutoff.
Only 20% of your team can have an off-night for the team to be successful. Or 1 weight miss as a swap. Having a failure rate/no-show buffer of 40% (3 of 5) seems too generous.
yipBut let's be real some of these teams have an automatic Miss on their team...
^This^It's the responsibility of every player in a team to make sure everybody submit his/her picks in time. You can exchange email addresses or phone numbers to text the person who's late to submit.
my teammates are a buncha mutes. we should called the Silent AuctionsIt's the responsibility of every player in a team to make sure everybody submit his/her picks on time. You can exchange email addresses or phone numbers to text the person who's late to submit.
It's the responsibility of every player in a team to make sure everybody submit his/her picks on time. You can exchange email addresses or phone numbers to text the person who's late to submit.